Is the MGM "Vintage Classics" DVD the theatrical version of the film (not the shortened version of the film when the director trimmed 10 minutes), and is it presented in its original theatrical aspect ratio? Also, is the transfer a good quality?
I've checked the reviews on Amazon, but they have very mixed reviews.
Thanks for the help.
[deleted]
I just viewed MGM Vintage Classic DVD. I thoroughly enjoyed the movie, but the print is mediocre at best. Problem is I can only find one other USA release (HBO) which was released 4 years earlier than this MGM release. A new release would be most welcomed!
shareYeah, I bought it on DVD a couple of years ago and the transfer is terrible. Faded out, no detail in the darks or shadows, over all pretty darn sorry. Like it or not, it was quite popular when it came out and maybe, just maybe, somebody will digitally restore it for re-release.
P.S. I liked it when it first came out in American theaters, especially that delightful little tramp, Diane Cilento. And Hugh Griffith was absolutley the dean of character actors. Overall, worth a look (but on a better DVD).
Sad to say, that is pretty typical of MGM's DVD releases. They shove out the films on DVD with no attention to the quality of the release. Makes you appreciate companies like Warner and Criterion which make an effort.
shareDo not buy the DVD, I'm sorry I did.
Although I like the movie a lot, the images and sound are so poor, it's impossible for me to enjoy it.
The reason the picture looks so bad is that United Artists did not preserve it properly. When Robert A. Harris (the man who restored Lawrence of Arabia) looked for prints to restore Tom Jones, the only thing he could find was a worn-out Technicolor print that was too damaged to duplicate (and this, a movie that won best picture! You can imagine how badly their lesser films have been treated!). That is what happens when money-hungry studios don't invest in protecting their (and our) own film heritage.
Shame on them! :(
For the record, the MGM DVD is the original theatrical version of the film while the earlier released (and hard to come by) HBO DVD is the shortened version.
The MGM DVD is also in widescreen.
I didn't think the transfer was too bad; it was really only the night scenes that could use a lot of work. The day scenes weren't perfect, but still good.
I would reccommend buying the MGM Vintage Classics DVD. It's cheap, the transfer isn't perfect but still watchable (it's on par with a VHS tape, maybe even a little better), and it's the only release of the film in widescreen and with it's original running length intact.
Oscar Buzz's Favorite Best Picture: The Sound of Music (1965)
I agree with dbblsanta's opinions of the transfer: it is the night scenes, especially in what must have been reels 1 and 2, that are the worst quality.Everything else, including the sound quality, is erratic but ok. It really is worth putting up with these minor inconveniences: the movie itself has such fantastic energy!
shareAll the dark scenes are really dark. Even scenes I don't think were supposed to be dark lose any watchability. I thought maybe the filmmakers were going for underexposed, but may very well be the DVD
shareToday, 28 May 2007, a new DVD is being released. Might be worth taking a look at. If the showing that I just watched on STARZ is any indication of the DVD itself, the previous DVD's problems with image transfer have been overcome because what I saw was very watchable. I cannot testify as to any editing or scene reductions at this time.
I can't find the new DVD release that you refer to. I think simply the MGM Vintage Classics version has been made available again after being out of print. It pains me to say that, because the DVD is atrocious. I watched it again two nights ago, and about 10% of the scenes look good; the others show some of the worst damage I've ever seen to such a widely popular classic. The spotty fading was unbelievable and obnoxious to watch. The sound quality is awful as well. Truly a pity. Extensive restorative efforts would be required to bring this pic up to even modest standards.
share